deSouza Ian S, Martindale Jennifer L, Sinert Richard
SUNY Downstate/Kings County Hospital, New York, USA.
Emerg Med J. 2015 Feb;32(2):161-7. doi: 10.1136/emermed-2013-202973. Epub 2013 Sep 16.
We performed a systematic review of the literature to compare the efficacy of different drug therapies for the termination of stable, monomorphic ventricular tachycardia (VT).
We searched EMBASE, MEDLINE and Cochrane for trials from 1965 through July 2013 using a search strategy derived from the following clinical question in PICO format:
Adults (≥18 years) with stable monomorphic VT;
Intravenous antidysrhythmic drug; Comparator: Intravenous lidocaine or amiodarone;
Termination of VT. For all drug comparisons, we calculated relative risks (RR; 95% CI) and number needed to treat (NNT, 95% CI) between drugs. We also evaluated the methodological quality of the studies.
Our search yielded 219 articles by PubMed and 390 articles by EMBASE. 3 prospective studies (n=93 patients) and 2 retrospective studies (n=173 patients) met our inclusion and exclusion criteria. From the prospective studies, RR of VT termination of procainamide versus lidocaine was 3.7 (1.3-10.5); ajmaline versus lidocaine, RR=5.3 (1.4-20.5); and sotalol versus lidocaine, RR=3.9 (1.3-11.5). From the retrospective studies: procainamide versus lidocaine, RR=2.2 (1.2-4.0); and procainamide versus amiodarone RR=4.3 (0.8-23.6). All 5 reviewed studies had quality issues, including potential bias for randomisation and concealment.
Based on limited available evidence from small heterogeneous human studies, for the treatment of stable, monomorphic VT, procainamide, ajmaline and sotalol were all superior to lidocaine; amiodarone was not more effective than procainamide.
我们对文献进行了系统综述,以比较不同药物疗法终止稳定型单形性室性心动过速(VT)的疗效。
我们使用从以下以PICO格式呈现的临床问题推导而来的检索策略,在EMBASE、MEDLINE和Cochrane数据库中检索1965年至2013年7月的试验:
患有稳定型单形性VT的成年人(≥18岁);
静脉注射抗心律失常药物;对照:静脉注射利多卡因或胺碘酮;
VT终止。对于所有药物比较,我们计算了药物之间的相对风险(RR;95%置信区间)和治疗所需人数(NNT,95%置信区间)。我们还评估了研究的方法学质量。
我们的检索通过PubMed获得219篇文章,通过EMBASE获得390篇文章。3项前瞻性研究(n = 93例患者)和2项回顾性研究(n = 173例患者)符合我们的纳入和排除标准。在前瞻性研究中,普鲁卡因胺与利多卡因相比,VT终止的RR为3.7(1.3 - 10.5);阿义马林与利多卡因相比,RR = 5.3(1.4 - 20.5);索他洛尔与利多卡因相比,RR = 3.9(1.3 - 11.5)。在回顾性研究中:普鲁卡因胺与利多卡因相比,RR = 2.2(1.2 - 4.0);普鲁卡因胺与胺碘酮相比,RR = 4.3(0.8 - 23.6)。所有5项纳入综述的研究都存在质量问题,包括随机化和隐匿方面的潜在偏倚。
基于来自小型异质性人体研究的有限现有证据,对于稳定型单形性VT的治疗,普鲁卡因胺、阿义马林和索他洛尔均优于利多卡因;胺碘酮并不比普鲁卡因胺更有效。